We learn this from the Wall Street Journal:

Housing and Urban Development Secretary Alphonso Jackson is expected to announce his resignation Monday, according to people familiar with the matter, a decision that will deal a blow to the Bush administration’s efforts to tackle the housing crisis.

The exact reasons for Mr. Jackson’s decision couldn’t be learned. Earlier this month, two Democratic senators, Patty Murray of Washington and Christopher Dodd of Connecticut, sent a letter to President Bush urging him to request Mr. Jackson’s resignation, arguing that accusations of wrongdoing had made him ineffective.

Fair enough.  But what about HUD itself?  Is HUD effective or ineffective?

As a two-time HUD staffer, I continue to maintain that America needs to seriously assess what the federal government does right in housing, and what it does wrong.  Part of that assessment must be whether HUD is part of the solution or part of the problem.

HUD’s history is replete with examples of wrongdoing — corruption, even.  Are the leaders all solely to blame, or could it be the place itself?

If Al Jackson is eventually proven of wrongdoing, clearly the right thing to do is to get rid of him.

But HUD will remain.

And so will the potential for more wrongdoing.

My old boss, Jack Kemp, once said of the department’s scandals that preceded his tenure as HUD Secretary: “We are cleaning out the stables.”

Still a noble cause — but what if we just shut the stables down?